T=Total Depravity

Only if the irresistable force ideas of Calvinism are true. But if you assume Calvinism is true and use that to objectively evaluate an Arminian position - you use circular reasoning.

In the Arminian view - the drawing of God ENABLES the TD sinner to choose life but does not force him to.

Big difference.

Yes (See John 5) there will be a resurrection of the just (pre-Millenial, called the FIRST resurrection in Rev 20) and a resurrection of the unjust (post-Millenial) - and they will be subject to the 2nd death - the lake of fire.

What a hoot!

I am giving ALL mankind 10 dollars - and by ALL I mean an arbitrarily selected FEW among the TYPES (of which there are only two - the type that live in my house and the type that don't) -- Hah!

I love the extent to which Calvinism is willing to spin the text so that the plain and obvious ALL becomes the arbitrarily select "FEW" of Matt 7.

In Christ,

Bob

 

So God only ENABLED me to choose Him? Then I chose Him! Cool. I've earned my salvation by making the right choice. Thus, God owes me eternal life, because that's what I'm due because of my work of faith that I conjured up.

As for giving 10 bucks to all whom you choose, that's your right. It's your money to give away. But did those you are giving the money to earn it by choosing it. If so, you aren't giving it to them. You owe them.

Doesn't God have the freedom to give new life and faith to whom He wishes? Just as you have the freedom to give ten bucks to whomever you wish? After all, the wind blows where it wishes... so is everyone who is born of the Spirit (John 3:8). By His doing we are in Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 1:30, and those in Christ were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, BUT OF GOD (John 1:13).

 

Hello Skandelon.

Total depravity is a bit of a misnomer. The doctrine is better served with total inability.
It is obvious to people that we are not totally depraved in the way people would think of totally depraved. Totally depraved always meant total inability.

Why God does things is not possible to answer unless He tells us. In the case of Pharoah He says He did for him.
Under the natural conditions that God set up He included cause and effect. Pharoah was born with a hard heart but he was not born stupid. Once Moses had established the fact that he could rain down trouble it would be only sensible to yeild. This he was prevented from doing because God wanted to make sure He showed us what He is like. Rom 9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."
No good if Pharoah gave in after the first round now is it? God wanted to display His glory.

Those He hardens and those He softens are two different groups. You shall have to be more specific with the question. Non-elect means not elect. The status of people cannot change. Election took place in eternity and is fixed, like God it is immutable.

Why would He tell people to obey the law when He knows no one can keep it? DT 5:32 So be careful to do what the LORD your God has commanded you; do not turn aside to the right or to the left. 33 Walk in all the way that the LORD your God has commanded you, so that you may live and prosper and prolong your days in the land that you will possess.

To fulfill scripture, " PS 78:2 I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter hidden things, things from of old."

LK 8:9 His disciples asked him what this parable meant. 10 He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, " `though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'

It is to stop them understanding. Understanding does not save you. Judas must have understood a lot. For some reason it was decided to leave them, those He chose not, in the dark. It increases wrath.

JN 12:39-40 For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: 40 "He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them."

I on the other hand use the 'otherwise'. I see, I hear, I am the otherwise. He did not blind me I know. The others cannot see. It is a reassurrance for me.
MT 13:15 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.'
You see the Matthew passage is about what man is doing. The others are what God is doing. If we look at men and watch what they do then we are watching God at work. As He worked with them to bring about His pleasure so He worked with me to the same end, His pleasure.

I think 'otherwise' is a figure of speech that denounces the Jewish nation.
Jesus said, "And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. 24 But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."
It's not so much to do with Sodom but with Israel. He says look how bad they were but you are worse.

When God speaks to Israel He is speaking to the Church and all the people in it. The saved and the unsaved. We must distinquish who is who.

johnp.

 

Hello BobRyan.

Is free will not enough then that we also need to be drawn?

Now you don't mean all men do you Bob old chap, you go too far surely?
Tell me why the plain and obvious includes Eli's sons. Eli was told that no sacrifice would be given for them. Your 'all' must exclude them. In the excluding of Eli's sons the hoot, if you excuse the pun, is on the other foot!
Isaiah 3:14 Therefore, I swore to the house of Eli, `The guilt of Eli's house will never be atoned for by sacrifice or offering.' "

Now Bob, I've used this several times and no one responds. Please relieve my ignorance or cede the point.

'All' means 'not all'.

johnp.

 

Hello JP

As a former Calvinists I am very fimiliar with the terminology. I own Chosen By God authored by Sproul too.

I agree with everything you wrote except the idea that Pharoah was born with a hard heart. That is the only thing you said that cannot be support by the scripture.

Now, let's look at what you concluded about Pharoah. He was hardened so as not to let the people go to early, because God wanted to accomplish His purpose in the passover and to show his ultimate glory. Now, we know that the first passover was a foreshadowing of what was to come. Pharoah was hardened in order to accomplish the first passover, but the Jews were hardened in order to accomplish the real passover. The Jews were hardened also so as to graft in the Gentiles but even after being hardened they may be saved (Rom. 11:14). For God didn't harden them in order to condemn them, he hardened them into disobedience in order to show them mercy (Romans 11:30-32). You see the prophecy says that the ingrafting of the Gentiles will provoke the Jews to envy and they too might be saved. (Rm. 10-11)

My point is that the same group spoken of in Romans 9 as stumbling or being hardened is the same group that Paul speaks of "not stumbling beyond recovery" (11:11) and "being provoked to envy" so that they might be saved (11:14) and being grafted back in. (11:23) Therefore they cannot be the non-elect of your system.

The law was not given for the purpose of saving them. It was given them as a tutor. It was to show them their need. It was to bound to over to disobedience so that God might have mercy on them (Rom. 11:32) In other words the law wasn't given so that they could keep it in order to be saved. The gospel was given for the purpose of a response by faith unto salvation. And people who hear the the words of Christ and reject them are not going to be judged by the law, they are going to be judged by the words of Christ that they rejected. In other words, they aren't being held accountable for their keeping of the Law, they are being held accountable for their response to the gospel of Grace.

But it doesn't just say they might understand, it says:

Mark 4:11 And He said to them, "To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, 12 so that
'Seeing they may see and not perceive,
And hearing they may hear and not understand;
Lest they should turn,
And their sins be forgiven them.'"

So it not just stoping the potential of them understanding, but the potential of them being forgiven.

The point is that they cannot believe because they were hardened, NOT because they were born Totally unable. The hardening is temporary as Rom 11 states and its not for condemnation but in order for God to show mercy as Romans 11:30-32 clearly shows.

On what basis do you dismiss this as a "figure of speech"? I see no reason in the text to come to that conclusion. The only reason someone might do that is to protect their dogma.

This passage seems to support my position more than yours. Why would miracles performed have any potential to lead Sodom to salvation if indeed they were born Totally Unable? Miracles and other such outside influences would have no effect on one born Totally unable yet this passage seems to indicate otherwise.

I enjoy our discussion. Thanks for being so civil with me despite our disagreement.

 

Hello Skandelon.

Me.
I agree.

Me.
I agree with you. I need to spend more time on this than I have got. I'll get back to next week God willing. Skandelon willing.

johnp.

 

Depravity is a cause--inability is an effect.

Depravity=void of good; therefore unable to perform anything good, i.e. seek God, chose God, make a right decision, excercise "our" faith, pray a sinner's pray etc. etc.

"Total" adds to the pervasiveness of the situation.

We have not the ability to do anything good because of the Adamic nature--the sin nature is genetic.

That is what the Grace of God is all about. He pulled us out of the miry clay--because we could not because of our totally depraved nature.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

I am not following this reasoning here. If God inable me then I chose it goes to my credit, but if I promise to pay all peoples debt but they have to take or choose to accept the payment then I owe them.

What factor turns the reciever of the gift into the one who recieves the praise? No where at no time have people ever got credit for a gift because they recieved it! That doesn't make logical sense. At my birhtday and christmas time the gifts cease being a gift when I have to raise my arms to recieve them. They then are earned? These type of logic from calvinist always baffles me. Christ made, purchase salvation at the cross. It is a done deal, finished, total package. For someone to accept that gift does not mean they have earned it. That is total nonsense. Not by will of man is simply saying that I could not will my way to salvation, live a perfect life or come up with some means to make my salvation. It was done solely By God's will. He provided the way as only He could. Accepting that gift makes me no more a part of the work of salvation as standing in the Empire state building gives me credit for the building of it! I do not ask my boss for extra money when he hands me my check because I have to recieve it nor does recieving salvation mean I have worked for it.

Tim

 

Hello Tim.

Believing is a work!
JN 6:28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
JN 6:29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

So we must have the ability given without consent, against our natural inclinations. He wills in our will to do His will. He is Sovereign.

It would be if you willed it in yourself. This is a good thing, to trust in God is good. Total depravity means we have no good in us.

Bro.James.

Let's talk to the unconverted about the effect. It causes a break in communication because they know, think they know, that people have goodness.
When we say that we are unable to do good towards God it gets over the problem of offence.
I think.

johnp.

 

Over the offense...??

God bringing us to the point that we see we are lost and condemned without remedy of ourselves should cause us to repent--which it does--and we reach out and grab the lifeline--Jesus.

That is the Grace of God--we do not deserve salvation--there is nothing good we can do to earn salvation--all the praise goes to God. He even gives us the faith to believe--what marvelous Grace.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Bro.James.

The offence people take when they hear that man is totally depraved is an offence against their common sense.
To the non Christian Total depravity is like a Hitler, a Stalin and company. They do not realise that we are all the same and everything is dependant on God's will.
People know people. They give and receive helping hands. This is not total depravity to them. We lose the audience when we talk outside their experience. If we tell them they can do nothing good towards God, there is a difference don't you think.

Only to the non Christian. Say what you like to the Arminians! It's good sport!

Praise the Lord.

johnp.

 

It would be if you willed it in yourself. This is a good thing, to trust in God is good. Total depravity means we have no good in us.

ME: Yes but I explained earlier in the first post that no one can will or make their own salvation. It was provided by the will of God. That is my interptation and it leaves no contradiction of the word. Have no problem with your def. of depravity, however it does not keep us from reacting to God's work of salvation.

Bro.James.

Let's talk to the unconverted about the effect. It causes a break in communication because they know, think they know, that people have goodness.
When we say that we are unable to do good towards God it gets over the problem of offence.
I think.

ME: Not really sure what you mean here but I will tell you that salvation was not required of God. He could have let us all rot in our sin. There was nothing owed us, it was only by God's character, something in Him, not us, that He offers salvation. So I do not feel offended by the fact I was depraved. That is not my heart. In other words I am not argueing from the stand pt you seem to think I am.

Tim

johnp. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

The Rock of Offense--offends many people--see John 14:6.

When the Word is preached, the Holy Spirit convicts the lost sheep of sin, righteousness and judgement to come.

Total depravity is right in there with sin.

Jesus did not come to call the righteous but sinners to repent.

"Hell fire and Brimstone" is still an effective way to turn people toward Calvary. Some will repent some won't--no one comes to the Father without the Spirit drawing. This is not about "making a decision for Christ".

Selah,

Bro. James

 

I agree with you Bro. James. Scare the Hell out of em. The whole counsel of God is required, without doubt.

Total depravity is a desciption of a fact. Total depravity is not understood as it is a technical term that we understand, it is better replaced with total inability for the reasons already stated for those who think in human terms.

I would not water down the beer let alone God's word.
Don't forget, total depravity is a human term used to describe a Divine revelation. They misunderstand it. As far as it is possible stoop. He did.

I understand that and believe it without a problem. Praise the Lord. What am I that He should have showered this knowledge upon me? They will be saved who will be saved. Let us be the ones that God uses to call effectively and let us not be the ones that are used to harden them. We do God's work, for the good. Softening and hardening. We should pray that He uses us to be the instruments of salvation. I pray for this for me, there are more kingdom points in it for me and I'll have more people thanking me in the glorious Kingdom. Store up in Heaven.

Forgive me for saying so but you seem a little harsh. This is not a critisism, we are what we are by the grace of God. I see all men under the direct control of God. What do you see as the difficulty in saying total inability rather than total depravity? I am talking to God and waiting to see how He responds.

Anyway, it's nice to meet you brother.

johnp.

 

Hello Timtoolman.

Says you.

But you just said that He did because if God left His mercy for us to do with as we please then we say thanks, no thanks don't we? Or I have read Romans 8:7-9 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. 8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

How do you resolve that?

There is room in your reply for misunderstanding. Forgive me if I am wrong in thinking you are saying that it depends on us. Since Christ died for our sins and suffered the death of deaths what makes you think He would leave it up to us to decide if we want to take advantage of it after He tells us that we hate Him.

I agree with this. He saved us.

johnp.

 

JP,

I appreciate you objectiveness on my other post. I look forward to hearing back from you on those points.

Romans 8 says that men can't submit to God's LAW, it says nothing about their ability or lack thereof to respond in faith to the powerful gospel of truth. Calvinists say that a response of faith would "please" God therefore they couldn't do that, but that is reading your view into the text. It says that while one is controlled by the sinful nature he cannot please God, it says nothing about his ability to LEAVE THE SIN NATURE and turn to God in FAITH once confronted by God's powerful means of salvation, the Gospel truth.

Plus, even Christians who are acting under the control of their sin nature (as Paul refers to in Chapter 7) don't please God, its only those things done in faith that please him (Heb. 11:6). This passage says nothing about mans ability or lack thereof to act in faith. It ONLY says that while the man is acting in his sin nature that he cannot please the Father. Most importantly it doesn't even mention the powerful potential effect of the gospel's truth.

 

Depravity/inability,

We seem to be saying the same thing-- in different ways.

A good understanding of total depravity(the cause), helps one to see the inability to save one's self (the effect).

The realization of this dire circumstance should be a "rude awakening" to the truth of the matter. "Modern" evangelistic methods seem to be having The Holy Spirit begging, pleading and cajoling the lost sinner to repent of his lost condition. Conviction of the sin is not a passive process.

The stark realization of this situation is harsh to the "status quo", as it well should be. Yet, the effect is quite obvious: some will curse, others will flee to Golgotha.

Selah,

Bro. James

 

Hello Skandelon.

You speak about the power of the gospel truth as if the gospel truth has an intrinsic power of it's own. I find this to be strange. God works through His word enpowering it. He is the Word. We cannot view His word without Him, as if it is a persuasive piece of work on which our mind acts alone. The mind of the sinful man is death. That needs to be changed before we accept anything from Him.
For a man to respond to the command of God, and it is a command therefore a law, to repent and believe, we must obey Him. This is impossible as the fallen nature controls us and wills not, therefore cannot, turn around from hostility to love. It would be acting against our will. The fallen nature has no will to act against itself. Our will is bound to our nature. What other nature have we that our will can attach itself to? Our will needs to be attached to another nature first before we can decide for God. Rebirth comes before all else, a new nature is needed otherwise our will is stuck with the fallen nature and the fallen nature wills not God, except as we want Him to be. Does that make sense?

The power of the gospel is God. You have recognised that there is power there. It does not come by words alone but God works in His word to turn people around, those He has chosen, from hate to love. This is not acheived by God working with our fallen nature but by giving us a new one for our will to attach to. The fallen nature is still there but has now lost it's power to use our will. With ever increasing success we are enabled to overcome it but not before, not before, we have a new nature.
Paul, in Romans seven, from verse thirteen, is speaking as a Christian. This is the truth about us even now. We see the good we want to do but we are unable to do it. If a Christian does not see that in himself then he might think that he is able to be sinless until he sins. That is error. A man is sin. Primarily Christ died for what we are not what we do or did. This is a blessing. It does not matter what you did or do that is the important thing. The important thing is what we are. In that we are all the same, fallen. Falling short is not a thing we do sometimes, it is our continual state until we get our spirits made perfect in death. Until then it does not matter how many sixes we add to our number we will never get to seven. That is the state of sin, falling short. Selfrighteousness does not become us.
It ONLY says that while the man is acting in his sin nature that he cannot please the Father. That's just the point, we are sin. Our nature is sin and we act that out and only that. You seem to be saying that we can act against our nature or that there is some other nature in us that would enable the Ethiopian to change his spots. It's a new nature that is needed to respond to God. A new nature is needed, the old one is broken beyond repair and is to be consumed in the fire.
The cross shows us what man thinks of God even as we worship Him.

Gal 2:20 The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
This is personal. His gift to man was not a gift given to man in general but in love to the objects of His love. The idea that this love is a general love debases love. The idea that Jesus loved Judas has much as He loves me would leave me with the sense that He does not love me. Because if He loved Judas as He loves me what good is that love? How is that love useful? I'd rather be hated by the One that sends me to Hell. Unrequited love is unbearable for man. Imagine an everlasting God in mourning for those He loves consigned to Hell by Himself. This is a horror. Having sent those He has an everlasting love for to Hell! No way man. He'd rather go Himself, that's love! Did you see the film AI? It is a nightmare. Lost love. God could not live with that. Love is active, it is not passive. It bears all things and never fails. He is crazy about us. The Song of Songs is being lived out in His life and nothing will stop Him winning His bride. Us. The others have no part in Him and they are only tolerated for the sake of His loved ones yet to be born.

How is it possible that while we are at war with Him and under the control of the sinful nature we, at the same time, can turn to Him in faith. You make it sound as if that is the easy bit. Faith is a powerful thing. It can move mountains.
You are saying that we can overcome that sinful nature in our own strength and escape by just believing. It's the 'just believing' that is the impossible thing.
That choice Adam and Eve made in the garden is still being made by man. It's a question of sovereignty. Mankind in it's state of sin wants to be sovereign above all things. We think it must be our decision to go to God. Our choice. And being our choice makes God not sovereign.
My God is Sovereign. He does not have the final say in anything ever. He has the first say in everything, He has all the say.

How's that?

johnp.

 

Hi John P;

Your problem here is you think that man has no righteousness at all. I admit that mans righteousness is as a filthy rag, but God's word does not say man has none. Filthy it may be, but still there. It has to be it was compared to that of Christ as that filthy rag. You might say well that rag is worthless, but then you may not know it that two thousand years ago they didn't throw it out they washed it out and reused it. Textiles were very valuable then because there was so little of it. They did the same with the rags they used as toilet necessities. Believe me they got them clean they most likely used a lye soap know as fullers soap.
Mal 3:2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap:
Total inability or depravity doesn't exist.
Man doesn't desever to be saved because of his sin not because he is worthless. Why would our Lord die for man if man was worthless. It's obvious to me that we were worth the sacrifice of Christ or He wouldn't have laid down His life for us.
Thank God that He thought we worth saving.
May God Bless You with Light;
Mike

 

Romans 3:10 As it is written: "There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God. 12 They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one."

Man's "good" is for the glory of man- usually one's self. Only those things that glorify God qualify as truly good, ie. righteous.